Authors, reviewers, and editors all have ethical obligations with regard to the published science. In order to maintain high ethical standards of publication, the publisher attempts to work closely with journal editors, authors, and peer-reviewers. The ethics statement for Review in Science and Engineering (JRSE) journal is based on those by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org. The essentials of JRSE’s publishing ethics for all groups involved in the publication process are as follows:
EDITORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES The editor of a journal holds a vital position taking important editorial decisions on all peer-reviewed submitted for publication. The editor should attempt to ensure timely peer review and publication process and should avoid unnecessary delays. The editors and other editorial board members should not be involved in editorial decisions on their own submitted work. They should be excluded from publication decisions when they are authors or even have contributed to a manuscript. The editor should give peer reviewers explicit guidance on their role and responsibilities and monitor their performances for quality and timeliness. The editor should ensure confidential handling of the submitted manuscripts and not disclose any information on submitted manuscripts before their publication. The editor should assess manuscripts for their scientific quality content, in an unbiased manner and free from any decisions based on discrimination of race, gender, geographical origin, or religion of the author(s). The editor should evaluate manuscripts regarding their academic merit free of any self-interest.
PEER REVIEWERS’ RESPONSIBILITIES Peer reviewers should provide a detailed, constructive, and unbiased evaluation in a timely manner on the scientific content of the submitted work. They should judge each manuscript on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, academic degree or institutional affiliation of the author(s). Peer reviewers should play an important role in identifying misconduct such as possible data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, unethical research, redundant or duplicate publication, conflict of interests and notify the journal editor as the possibility of such problems exists. Peer reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the complete review process. Peer Reviewers should provide a constructive, comprehensive, evidenced, and appropriately substantial peer-review report. Peer Reviewers must avoid making statements in their report which might affect any person’s reputation. Peer Reviewers are required to only agree to peer review manuscripts within their expertise and within a reasonable timeframe. Peer Reviewers should notify the editor in the case of declining the review in any case. Peer Reviewers are required to destroy submitted manuscripts and all related material after they have reviewed them.
AUTHORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES Authors should make publicly available all the results of their research and are accountable for the completeness and accuracy of their reports. Author(s) should warrant that the submitted manuscript is from their own original work, which does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any other person or entity, and it is free from any kind of plagiarism including their own previously published work. All authors named on the paper are equally held accountable for the content of a submitted manuscript or published paper although having different contributions. The work should not have been published elsewhere or submitted to any other journal(s) at the same time. Author(s) must clearly declare any potential conflict of interest. Author(s) must disclose all sources of funding for the research reported in the paper. If asked to provide a list of suggested reviewers, author(s) must provide the correct details for suitable reviewers with the appropriate experience to review, ensuring that the suggested reviewers do not have a conflict of interest. Author(s) must obtain permission from any content used from other sources.
Authors, reviewers, and editors all have ethical obligations with regard to the published science. In order to maintain high ethical standards of publication, the publisher attempts to work closely with journal editors, authors, and peer-reviewers. The ethics statement for Review in Science and Engineering (JRSE) journal is based on those by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org.
The essentials of JRSE’s publishing ethics for all groups involved in the publication process are as follows:
EDITORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
The editor of a journal holds a vital position taking important editorial decisions on all peer-reviewed submitted for publication.
The editor should attempt to ensure timely peer review and publication process and should avoid unnecessary delays.
The editors and other editorial board members should not be involved in editorial decisions on their own submitted work. They should be excluded from publication decisions when they are authors or even have contributed to a manuscript.
The editor should give peer reviewers explicit guidance on their role and responsibilities and monitor their performances for quality and timeliness.
The editor should ensure confidential handling of the submitted manuscripts and not disclose any information on submitted manuscripts before their publication.
The editor should assess manuscripts for their scientific quality content, in an unbiased manner and free from any decisions based on discrimination of race, gender, geographical origin, or religion of the author(s). The editor should evaluate manuscripts regarding their academic merit free of any self-interest.
PEER REVIEWERS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
Peer reviewers should provide a detailed, constructive, and unbiased evaluation in a timely manner on the scientific content of the submitted work. They should judge each manuscript on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, academic degree or institutional affiliation of the author(s).
Peer reviewers should play an important role in identifying misconduct such as possible data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, unethical research, redundant or duplicate publication, conflict of interests and notify the journal editor as the possibility of such problems exists.
Peer reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the complete review process.
Peer Reviewers should provide a constructive, comprehensive, evidenced, and appropriately substantial peer-review report.
Peer Reviewers must avoid making statements in their report which might affect any person’s reputation.
Peer Reviewers are required to only agree to peer review manuscripts within their expertise and within a reasonable timeframe.
Peer Reviewers should notify the editor in the case of declining the review in any case.
Peer Reviewers are required to destroy submitted manuscripts and all related material after they have reviewed them.
AUTHORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
Authors should make publicly available all the results of their research and are accountable for the completeness and accuracy of their reports.
Author(s) should warrant that the submitted manuscript is from their own original work, which does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any other person or entity, and it is free from any kind of plagiarism including their own previously published work.
All authors named on the paper are equally held accountable for the content of a submitted manuscript or published paper although having different contributions.
The work should not have been published elsewhere or submitted to any other journal(s) at the same time.
Author(s) must clearly declare any potential conflict of interest.
Author(s) must disclose all sources of funding for the research reported in the paper.
If asked to provide a list of suggested reviewers, author(s) must provide the correct details for suitable reviewers with the appropriate experience to review, ensuring that the suggested reviewers do not have a conflict of interest.
Author(s) must obtain permission from any content used from other sources.